Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T22:25:55.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

NATO and Its Commentators: The First Five Years

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Lawrence S. Kaplan
Get access

Extract

The signing of the North Atlantic Treaty on April 4, 1949, gave rise to a number of books and articles on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) the volume of which will probably continue for some time. The treaty and the organization that it created represent the clearest challenge to Soviet expansionism since the end of World War II. Through this action twelve nations of North America and western Europe resolved to consider an armed attack against one member an attack against them all, and to create sufficient stiength within the alliance to deter potential aggressors. But NATO's continuing interest to commentators stems from reasons other than its value as a weapon against the spread of communism. To some writers NATO appears to be a stimulant that would revive a moribund United Nations, to others it is the beginning of a new kind of alliance unprecedented in history, to still others, it is a symbol of America's rejection of isolationism. So vague are some of the treaty's articles and so rapid has been the evolution of the organization that almost any observer could derive whatever meaning he wishes out of NATO's development.

Type
Articles
Information
International Organization , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , November 1954 , pp. 447 - 467
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1954

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Available sources of information are official communiques of Council meetings, annual reports of military headquarters, and special publications of trie NATO Information Service such as NATO Handbook (2d Edition, Paris, 1953Google Scholar). In the United States the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Department of State Bulletinhave published pertinent documents and have expressed official views on NATO.

2 Burbank, Lyman B., “NATO and the United States Constitution”, Social Education, 05 1952 (XVI), p. 207–209, 221Google Scholar.

3 Wigforss, Harald, “Sweden and the Atlantic Pact”, International Organization, III, p. 434–443Google Scholar; Walton, Clarence C., “Background for the European Defense Community”, Political Science Quarterly, 03 1953 (LXVIII), p. 42—70CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bebr, Gerhard, “European Defence Community and the North American Alliance”, The George Washington Law Review, 06 1954 (XXII), p. 637–658Google Scholar.

4 Royal Institute of International Affairs, Atlantic Alliance: NATO's Role in the Free World (London and New York, 1952Google Scholar); Canadian In stilute of International Affairs, Bulwark of the West: Implications and Problems of NATO (Toronto, 1953Google Scholar).

5 Arthur C. Turner's role in the preparation of the Canadian report appears to have been larger than Donald McLachlan's in the British report.

6 Atlantic Alliance, p. viii.

7 Warne, J. D., N.A.T.O. and Its Prospect: A Study of the Defense Organization for Western Europe (New York, 1954Google Scholar).

8 Ibid., p. 76.

9 “R.C.A.F. NATO Build-up in Europe Continues”, Air Power (London), 10 1953 (I), p. 85–87Google Scholar; Kosman, Hans, “Dutch Share in Europe's Air Defense”, Aviation Age, 05 1953 (XIX), p. 26–27Google Scholar.

10 ”Problems of Standardization”, An Cosantóir, 11 1952 (XII), p. 547–549Google Scholar. Many articles of military interest in the military journals of the NATO allies have been translated and digested in the Military Review published monthly by the Command and General Staff School of Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

11 “There Is No Easy Way Out – A Second Look at Mainbrace”, Air Force, 01 1953 (XXXII), p. 21–23Google Scholar.

12 Horan, H. E., “Exercise Main Brace”, Royal Air Force Quarterly, 01 1953 (V), p. 33–39Google Scholar.

13 White, Theodore H., Fire in the Ashes: Europe in Mid-Century (New York, 1953Google Scholar).

14 Eliot, G. F., “Military Organization under the Atlantic Pact”, Foreign Affairs, 07 1949 (XXVII), p. 24–36Google Scholar.

15 Beavan, John, “From Ottawa to Rome”, The Twentieth Century, 11 1951 (CL), p. 371–377Google Scholar.

16 Middleton, Drew, “NATO Changes Direction”, Foreign Affairs, 04 1953 (XXXI), p. 427–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Wood, Robert J., “The First Year of SHAPE”, International Organization, VI, p. 175–191Google Scholar; Wright, Jerauld, “The North Atlantic Treaty Organization”, United States Naval Institute Proceedings, 12 1951 (LXVII), p. 1254–1265Google Scholar.

18 White, Theodore, “The Job Eisenhower Faces: The Tangled Skein of NATO”, The Reporter, 02 6, 1951 (IV), p. 12–17Google Scholar .

19 Spofford, Charles M., “NATO's Growing Pains”, Foreign Affairs, 10 1952 (XXXI), p. 95–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 de Seversky, Alexander P., Air Power: Key Survival (New York, 1950), p. 242Google Scholar; Fellers, Bonner, Wings for Peace (Chicago, 1953), p. 94—95Google Scholar.

21 Morgenthau, Hans J., In Defense of the Natwnal Interest: A Critical Examination of American Foreign Policy (New York, 1951Google Scholar).

22 Aron, Raymond, “French Public Opinion and the North Atlantic Treaty”, International Afairs, 01 1952 (XXVIII), p. 1–9Google Scholar.

23 Testimony of Eugene Dennis, General Secretary of the Communist Party, USA; United States. Congress (81st, 1st sess.), Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations. North Atlantic Treaty. Hearings… Washington, Government Printing Office, 1949. Part 2, p. 785–790Google Scholar.

24 Mueller-Hillebrand, M Burkhart, “Nationale Armee Oder Europaarmee?” Wehneissenschaftliche Rundschau, 04 1953 (III), p. 165–168Google Scholar.

25 de Almina, Conde, “El Problema militar de Pacto Atlantico”, Cuadernos de politica Internacional, 10.–12. 1950 (IV), p. 109–118Google Scholar. This article is listed in the International Political Science Abstracts, published by UNESCO in Paris, I, No. 3 (1951).

26 Middleton, Drew, The Defense of Western Europe (New York, 1952), p. 310Google Scholar.

27 Kruls, H. J., “The Defense of Europe”, Foreign Afairs, 01 1952 (XXVIII), p. 276Google Scholar.

28 Fox, William T. R. and Fox, Annette Baker, “Britain and America in the Era of Total Diplomacy”, Memorandum No. I (1952), Center of International Studies, Princeton UniversityGoogle Scholar; Fox, William T. R., “NATO and Coalition Diplomacy”, in Patterson, E. M., ed., The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 07 1953 (CCLXXVIII), p. 114–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Eccles, Henry E., “Allied Staffs”, United States Naval Institute Proceedings, 08 1953 (LXXIX), p. 859–869Google Scholar.

29 Atlantic Alliance, p. ix.

30 Warburg, James P., Faith, Purpose, and Power: A Plea for a Positive Policy (New York, 1950), p. 108–113, 128–131Google Scholar. However, Cass Canfield, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the United World Federalists, in his testimony before the Senate accepted NATO as an emergency measure even though he shared Warburg's fears. See United States. Congress (81st, 1st Sess.) Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations. North Atlantic Treaty. Hearings…, cited above, Part 3, p. 841–847Google Scholar.

31 Kirk, Grayson, “Atlantic Pact and International Security”, International Organization, III, p. 239–251Google Scholar.

32 Roberts, Owen J., “Atlantic Union Now”, Foreign Policy Bulletin, 04 7, 1951 (XXX), p. 3–4Google Scholar.

33 Tannenbaum, Frank, “The Balance of Power versus the Coordinate State”, Political Science Quarterly, 06 1952 (LXVII), p. 173–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

34 Kelsen, Hans, Recent Trends in the Law of the United Nations: A Supplement to “The United Nations” (New York, 1951), p. 920–925Google Scholar.

35 Atlantic Alliance, p. 124, 127.

36 Robbins, Lionel, “Towards the Atlantic Community”, Lloyds Bank Review, London, 07 1950 (New Series, XVII), p. 1–25Google Scholar.

37 Gascuel, Jacques, “Vers une politique européenne”, Politique Étrangère, 09 1950 (XV), p. 437–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 Lohen, E., “Mot en europeisk fastlands-fØderasjon” (Against a Continental Federation), Intenasional Politikk, Bergen, X, (1952), p. 228–232Google Scholar. This article appears in the International Political Science Abstracts, III, No. 1 (1953)Google Scholar.

39 Sandwell, B. K., “North Atlantic-Community or Treaty”, International Journal, Toronto, Summer 1952 (VII), p. 169–172Google Scholar.

40 1Spender, Percy C., “NATO and Pacific Security”, in Palmer, Norman D., ed., “The National Interest — Alone or with Others?” The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 07 1952 (CCLXXXII), p. 115Google Scholar.

41 “Un esprit atlantique est-il possible?”, Revue de Defense Nationale, 05 1953 (IX), p. 544–555Google Scholar; Geiger, Theodore and Cleveland, H. Van B., “Making Western Europe Defensible: An Appraisal of the Effectiveness of United States Policy in Western Europe”, National Planning Association, Pamphlet No. 74 (Washington, 08 1951), p. 60–69Google Scholar.

42 Heeney, A. D. P., “Relation of N.A.T.O. to the Atlantic Community”, Report of the First International Study Conference on The Atlantic Community at Oxford, September 7th to 13th, 1952 (London, 1952), p. 59–60Google Scholar.

43 Lippmann, Walter, Isolation and Alliances: An American Speaks to the British (Boston, 1952), p. 43–44Google Scholar.

44 Childs, Marquis, “Washington and the Atlantic Pact”, Yale Review, 06 1949 (XXXVIII), p. 577–588Google Scholar; “The North Atlantic Pact: Congross and the Military Commitment”, The World Today, 07 1949 (V), p. 296–304Google Scholar; Grayson Kirk, op. cit.

45 Ibid.

46 Heindel, Richard H., Kalijarvi, Thorsten V., and Wilcox, Francis O., “The North Atlantic Treaty in the United States Senate”, American Journal of International Law, 10 1949 (XLIII), p. 633–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Wilcox, F. O. and Kalijarvi, T. V., “The Organizational Framework of the North Atlantic Treaty” American Journal of International Law, 01 1950 (XLIV), p. 155–161Google Scholar.

47 Bailey, Stephen K. and Samuel, Howard D., Congress at Work (New York, 1953), p. 383–414Google Scholar ; Cheever, Daniel E. and Haviland, H. Field, Jr., American Foreign Policy and the Separation of Powers (Cambridge, 1952), p. 132–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

48 Burbank, Lyman B., “NATO and the United States Constitution”, Social Education, 05 1952 (XVI), p. 207–209, 221Google Scholar.

49 Hoskins, Halford L., The Atlantic Pact (Washington, 1949Google Scholar); Salvin, Marina, “The North Atlantic Pact”, International Conciliation, 04 1949, p. 373–455Google Scholar.

50 Angell, M Norman, “The Atlantic Pact in the American Tradition”, Yale Review, 06 1949 (XXVIII), p. 597–608Google Scholar.

51 Bulwark of the West, p. 58–59.

52 McLachlan, Donald H., “Rearmament and European Integration”, Foreign Affairs, 01 1951 (XXIV), p. 276–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 Atlantic Alliance, p. 106–107.

54 Holborn, Hajo, “American Foreign Policy and European Integration”, World Politics, 10 1953 (VI), p. 1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Northrop, F. S. C., “United States Foreign Policy and Continental European Union”, Harvard Studies in International Affairs 02 1954 (IV), p. 7–35Google Scholar.

55 Skar, Alfred, “Norway and the Atlantic Pact”, Ny Militar Tidskrift, 11 1949 (XXII), p. 290–292Google Scholar. Summarized in Military Review, 09 1950 (XXX), p. 78–81Google Scholar.

56 Bolles, Blair, “The Armed Road to Peace: An Analysis of NATO”, Headline Series, Foreign Policy Association, No. 92, 03–04 1951Google Scholar .

57 Department of State Publication 3462, March 1949, “The North Atlantic Pact”; ibid., 4630, August 1952, “NATO: Its Development and Significance.”

58 Bloch, Ernest R., “European Rearmament and United States Foreign Aid”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 11 1950 (XXXII), p. 339–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

59 Brown, William Adams Jr, and Opie, Redvers, American Foreign Assistance (Washington, 1953Google Scholar).

60 Elliott, William Yandell, Chairman of Study Group, United States Foreign Policy: Its Organization and Control (New York, 1952), p. 169–170Google Scholar.

61 The Administration of Foreign Affairs and Overseas Operations. A Report prepared for the Bureau of the Budget, Executive Office of the President, by the Brookings Institution (Washington, 1951Google Scholar).

62 The Brookings Institution, Major Problems of United States Foreign Policy, 1949 and succeeding years (WashingtonGoogle Scholar); Council on Foreign Relations, The United States in World Affairs, 1949 and succeeding years (New YorkGoogle Scholar ).

63 Krout, John A., ed., “The United States and the Atlantic Community”, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, 05 1949 (XXIIIGoogle Scholar); Patterson, Ernest M., ed., “NATO and World Peace”, The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 07 1953 (CCLXXXVIIIGoogle Scholar).